I recently read Steve Jobs biography. Very interesting in many ways. He was a huge Bob Dylan fan. Which made it interesting when Pandora served up "Forever Young", apparently written as a blessing for a child after Dylan became a father.I can imagine thinking that in my 30s with young children. Not so much today as they are young adults. Glad to see what they have become and more aware of my own mortality. And, yet, there's Bob Seeger singing this song with a children's choir at 91.

Anyway, Karen Reivich hooked me on videos of versions of great songs by great artists. Here's Bob, and The Band (who recorded with him), and Bob Seeger. So, enjoy. Which is your favorite?

Can the application of positive psychology on a broad scale create more positive cultures - habitual, common patterns of interaction that facilitate getting more of what's really important in life for more people? I've run across several items recently that have made me think about this. (I include excerpts and links below.)

Assuming that cultures really are significantly different from place to place in ways that make a real difference in how likely an individual is to get what's really important in life, and that we can call this a "positive culture":

1. What are the mechanisms of a positive culture? How can a non-positive culture establish the necessary set of such mechanisms? Are there mechanisms in a non-positive culture that must be actively destroyed in order to allow positive mechanisms to take hold?

2. What is the smallest area that can establish and maintain a stable, self-reinforcing positive culture?

3. What role does the legal structure play, and how does this affect the smallest area question. For example, in the US, could a city located in a state with complex legal requirements that make it difficult to operate a business succeed in creating a positive culture?

4. What research points the way forward in this area?

Here are the items that have stimulated my thinking:

An article in Der Speigel (http://bit.ly/rp9FbUl) focused on the cultural differences that make it much easier for a business to succeed in Estonia than in Greece. It begins with the story of Loukas Nakosmatis, a Greek who started a wholesale rose business in Greece four years ago and ultimately failed due to the habit of his customers of finding ways to make him deliver flowers on credit, then never paying. The article goes on:

As he tells his story, Nakosmatis is sitting outside under a blue evening sky, with Elias, Kostas and Krikor, fellow Greek expatriates, in front of the "Artemis," a small street restaurant he has opened in the pedestrian zone of the Estonian capital Tallinn. The business is going well, and Nakosmatis has begun to pay off his debts. A waiter is serving the guests at the next table: souvlaki, a mixed grill platter, Ouzo and Greek salad.

It's one of the few summer evenings in Tallinn when it's warm enough to eat outside. Half of the dozen or so small tables in his restaurant are taken by Japanese, Finns, Danes and Dutchmen, but there are no Estonians. A meal at his restaurant is too expensive for them, says Nakosmatis. Then he describes the two Estonian women he hired as waitresses.

"They are hardworking, honest and never late," he says. The group of Greek men falls silent for a moment. "Strange country," says Elias.

Second, and also focused on business, in the Nov. 3 Wall Street Journals, Daniel Henniger wrote a column basically questioning whether US Presidential candidate and governor of Texas Rick Perry had much to do with Texas' economic success in recent years, or whether it came from a difference in culture between Texas and states like California and New York:

In 1990, one of the world's biggest companies, Exxon Mobil, left New York City for Dallas. Exxon's former CEO, Lee Raymond, says the move in part was indeed about costs and New York State's notoriously overbearing tax authority. But it was also about working amid a culture of competence. "It's just the attitude in Texas of getting things done and doing them well," he says.

Mr. Raymond remarks that the economic policies that in time trapped the Northeast and Rust Belt in spirals of decline never touched Texas. But this is about something beyond low taxes and no unions: "In Texas the people tend to be farmers or individual businessmen, and they have this attitude: We have to make do with what we have and work together to get things done and survive. It's can-do. That attitude permeates everything there."

Finally, in a somewhat different vein, a post at Instapundit (http://bit.ly/vvTH9h) dealt with manners in the "South" (US). It included this email from a reader:

As a recent (female) Yankee transplant to the south, I can’t speak of past southern manners, but I can speak of what I’ve seen and experienced since I’ve been here. It’s been nothing short of culture shock, in a wonderful way. I work in a retail store where it’s occasionally required of me to help customers out to their cars with heavy packages. I have no problem with this, but I have yet to seen a man let me take the heavier box, and if I try to, they won’t let me. My male co-workers won’t curse in front of me, or even discuss “inappropriate” subjects without first saying “excuse my language” or “pardon me for this”. I routinely have customers tell me not to worry about helping them with heavy packages, and that I should make the guys carry them. I’m called “ma’am”! (And occasionally, “darlin’”, which is also perfectly acceptable.) I’m treated like a lady wherever I go, not just another random customer. I rarely have to open a door for myself, and I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been offered assistance to my car when my arms are full after grocery shopping, from both men and women alike.

And the women are no less polite and warm-hearted. They’re happy to have a quick chat or offer an opinion on something if asked by a random stranger. They’ll politely catch your attention if you’re dropped a penny or a piece of paper from your purse to return it. They seem to have a big, wide, authentic smile and a kind word for everyone. They say “Please” and “thank you”, and mean it. And most shockingly, those mothers who bring their young children with them into the stores actually discipline them to make them behave, and will even apologize to the employees if their kids are being unruly.

I’m amazed and grateful for a culture that teaches such manners. If this is a decline in southern manners, then I can only imagine what they were like at their peak.

Sometimes, it's good to remind ourselves that there are folks who are both incredibly successful and who give every evidence of being positive people who understand that other people matter. Joe Mauer, all-star catcher for the Minnesota Twins and ridiculously good at a lot of things, appears to be such a person. Read the story if you need a pick-me-up. Beyond that, notice those around you who are positive and engaged, be mindful so as not to take them for granted, and maybe work to move yourself toward more engagement and positivity!

Tweenbots -- small, smiling, simple, and on a mission they do not have the capcity to accomplish alone in New York City. What do the results suggest about our missions? What about others and their missions, even those who come into our lives briefly?

Britain's Got Talent produced a great group performance and an even better comment by Simon Cowell. I won't give it away, but be sure to watch until the 4:11 mark where he makes the comment. I think you'll know why I made this post on this blog! (Embedding has been disabled, so follow the link to a high quality video clip.)

Donations to many charitable institutions are down, but that may not be the correct measure of the nation's philanthropic impulses. Writing a check to an institution is impersonal, abstract and easy to quit. Far more difficult is canceling the kids' weekly music lessons when you know the piano teacher's husband just lost his job. Or firing the house cleaner who greets you every week with a new photo of her baby.

There's more than a touch of self-interest mixed in with the altruism, of course. Those who can afford luxuries like private piano lessons and weekly house cleaning aren't keen on forfeiting such luxuries -- something families freely acknowledge. But they also say their decisions are shaped in part by the pain that cutbacks may cause others.

"What we buy or stop buying, when we buy, for whom, and how much we spend are never simply decisions to maximize our own interests," said Viviana Zelizer, a Princeton professor who studies the intersection of sociology and economics. "The monies we spend signal which relationships matter to us."

Of course, nothing about us as human beings is simple. There's the aspect of wanting to maintain our lifestyle as long as possible, even in the face of reversals. And there is the "rational" analysis that, from a charitable standpoint, the money spent in this fashion might do more good for more people if given to a charity, but we don't know the people the charity helps; we know those whom we see every day. And, of course, some sellers work to maximize the connection, knowing that it helps. Is this a problem? Or are they, by cultivating relationships, adding value?

I generally stay away from pulling examples from relgious texts when I am talking about positive psychology. I don't want to confuse the two. Further, since I am familiar almost exclusively with Christian texts, using those stories tends to trigger reactions based on feelings toward organized Christian religion, not the points of the story. I'm going to make an exception in this case because "Christian charity" is so often invoked for the poor, sick or disabled who happen to be far away. I think it is those in front of us to whom we should be most attuned, and I think the Bible supports this view.

In the parable of Lazarus the beggar and the rich man that is found in the 16th Chapter of Luke, the rich man steps over Lazarus every day of his life as he leaves his house. Both die, and Lazarus goes to heaven, the rich man to hell. The point I draw is that it wasn't ignoring the needs of the faceless "many" that sent the rich man to hell; it was stepping over the beggar at his doorstep. Likewise, in the 25th Chapter of Matthew, in the story of the last judgment, the judgment is not based not on what those judged did for the "poor" -- it is personalized because what they did or did not do "to one of the least of these" was done or not done for Jesus.

This picture grabbed my attention in an ad on a website. It's from Wayfarer's Moon, an on-line cartoon. I noticed it because it is archery and the arrow is drawn on the correct side of the bow and the character is using a correct form for drawing the string. I see so much art with the arrow away from the archer (only correct for kyudo) and the archer "pinching" the string between thumb and index finger. Putting the arrow on the side away from the archer would make the arrow spin off the rest and out to the side as the fingers roll on the string as it is drawn. "Pinching" the string won't work at the draw weights of target bows, much less those for hunting or battle as in the fantasies that the art represents.

Beyond my hobby interests, however, the picture reminds me that we live in an time more characterized by possibilities and less by threats than almost any time in human history in any culture. Folks can make a living from skills in writing and arts, and even the gate-keeping function of published media has been breached, for good and ill. Thus, the effect of positive emotions, thought patterns, and relationships in helping us take advantage of opportunities is multiplied by more and bigger opportunities. Further, more individuals have a real chance to structure much of their "work" around their real strengths. This is good, very, very good!

I'd love to develop a seminar on the positive psychology of country music. It would be fun and easy! Except, of course, for copyright and licensing problems, which I suspect are virtually insurmountalbe for any reasonable investment of time, energy, and legal fees!

If I ever do this, one aspect I'll focus on is the role of positive psychology constructs in the face of adversity. Many of the constructs -- Seligman's attributional style theory, Dweck's theories of intelligence, and Snyder's hope theory -- really come into play when we face adversity. Perhaps the old saying should be revised to state, "When the going gets tough, the positive get going." Or, even more accurately, the positive never slow down. And, in that vein, I'd use Rodney Adkins' "If You're Going through Hell" as the musical interpretation. If you haven't heard this song, you can listen to a clip in the Amazon widget above or try here. (If you're a Firefly/Serenityfan, the video's a bonus. If not, well, maybe you'll become one!) (If the link doesn't work, youtube's taken that video down.) Here are the key lyrics:

Well you know those timesWhen you feel like there's a sign there on your backSay's I don't mind if ya kick meSeems like everybody hasThings go from bad to worseYou'd think they can't get worse than thatAnd then they do

You step off the straight and narrowAnd you don't know where you areUse the needle of your compassTo sew up your broken heartAsk directions from a genieIn a bottle of Jim BeamAnd she lies to YouThat's when you learn the truth

If you're going through hellKeep on going, Don't slow downIf you're scared, don't show itYou might get outBefore the devil even knows you're there

The title of this song comes from a Winston Churchill quote, "If you are going through hell, keep going." Churchill certainly faced uncontrollable negative events, and he responded in positive way. "Not me, not always, not everything" -- he didn't see himself or England as responsible, didn't think the causes of the conflict would always exist or that they would tarnish everything. This is positive attributional style, a/k/a "optimism", from the work of Marty Seligman. Churchill did not know exactly how England would win through, but he seems to have had confidence that they could figure it out. This is Carol Dweck's incremental view of intelligence. And, he clearly envisioned the goal of defeating the Nazi war machine, generated alternative pathways toward that end, and deemed himself and England capable of traversing those pathways, however rocky and winding they might be. That's Rick Snyder's Hope Theory.

At bottom, that's the power of habitual positive thought patterns and the regular experience of positive emotions -- those habits work! As Barb Fredrickson has shown, the survival value of positive emotions is in helping us broaden our behaviors and build connections with one another. That "together" idea is another good reason for the muscial metaphor. Solos are great, but we generally find the greatest music performed by groups.